BGil said:
And why do you keep bringing up the Digital Librarian and NeXT stuff anyway? What NeXT did before Apple purchased them has no bearing on the current Mac OS and it's specific implementation of CoreVideo, window widgets, or the new searchkit additions in Tiger. You claiming NeXT as if it was Apple building that OS is like claiming Palm built (or had anything to do with) the BeOS or Bill Gates/Microsoft and Lookout or the original OS he gave to IBM. It have nothing to do with what I'm talking aobut.
See, that is the difference between you and I. You are posting in this forum trying to show that Apple copied from Microsoft to push Windows as the pinnacle of computer technology. I, on the other hand, don't care if Apple was first... only that the correct history of the concepts is known.
Just because I am showing you where you are wrong doesn't mean that I have any sort of agenda like yours. If you think that I have a
Pro-Apple/Anti-Microsoft stance just because you are working from a
Pro-Microsoft/Anti-Apple position, then you've been working from a false assumption.
As for why I can bring up NeXT and Apple in the same breath... NeXT was founded by Steve Jobs and people he recruited from the Macintosh development team, and within three years almost every high level person at NeXT had replaced their Apple counter part at Apple following the acquisition.
Further, the reason Rhapsody's version numbers start at 5.0 is because it was the next version of that operating system after OPENSTEP 4.2.
And to top it all off, Apple continued to sell OPENSTEP and OpenStep Enterprise until 1999/2000 when Apple finally released a replacement for OPENSTEP... Mac OS X Server (May 1999).
And while selling and supporting NeXT products, Apple's name was attached to everything... like this NEXTSTEP update CD that Apple sent me.
Again, this is not about "file search" but specifically emails, appointments, contacts, tasks, saved searches, live queries, the plugin system for new formats, and file metadata. That's "desktop search". Think Windows Desktop Search, Find Fast, Google Desktop Search, X1, and Lookout not "file search" as imployed in Jaguar, Win9x, or Linux (not Beagle).
You didn't look to closely at the screenshot, did you? What you would have seen was Digital Librarian bringing up files that didn't have the search word in the file name.
And upon closer inspection you might have noticed what file types it was searching through (in that shot it had looked within rtf, rtfd, and ai). NeXT had made it known to developers that they could create a parsing service for Digital Librarian to be able to search content within proprietary document formats.
A hand full of document types that Digital Librarian could index...
WordPerfect
Microsoft Word (using ReadUp for parsing)
OpenWrite
WriteNow
WriteUp
Concurrence
FrameMaker
Illustrator
Postscript/Encapsulated Postscript
PDF (using PDFView for parsing)
Rich Text (rtf/rtfd)
Plain Text
Man Pages
And those are just the ones I can think of off hand. Any developer who wanted their documents to be searchable could make them that way.
And saved searches are called bookshelves... and I have quite a few of them. In fact, they can be shared with others over a network or stored on a CD to help quickly find things on that volume/media.
This was all back in 1989/90, which predates anything similar that Microsoft (or Google) had in Windows.
Unless you think Windows 3.0 had anything like this?
This is another attempt at you bringing up things as if they're related but they aren't. I'm talking about the web browsing metaphor in the Finder and Windows Explorer. Who had the first web browser doesn't relate to the first web-browsing metaphor in a file manager. Nor does single window browsing(I told you before this is nothing like column view).
In NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP the Workspace Manager didn't need to be in column view for single window browsing of the file system.
So until you can define what you seem to think the
web-browsing metaphor actually is, I see no way that the current Finder is copying Internet Explorer.
You did the same thing with the SGI stuff. 3D modeling has nothing to do with Apple and Microsoft's implementation of CoreVideo and Direct3D video playback. CoreVideo isn't similar to SGI or NeXT's technology at all but it's almost exactly the same (I actually haven't see any differences except for OpenGL versus DX).
Well, I currently use my 1993 Indy for video capture, this is because IRIX uses hardware acceleration to capture at full frame size and full frame rate, and completely bypasses the primary processor to do this. The same thing with 3D, SGIs used special geometry engines for rendering 3D objects that bypassed the primary processor. And again, NEXTSTEP bypassed the primary processor to utilize hardware acceleration on NeXT hardware.
The idea isn't new, it wasn't a first for Microsoft any more than it was for Apple.
Again, you keep making stuff up but while trying to make it sound relevant.
Fortunately history is on my side on all this so I don't have to make up anything.
If you had research this stuff before you had taken an indefensible position on these topics, you wouldn't be forced into a position of making stuff up (of course, you started with fabrications, which is a really bad foundation to start an argument with).
What does that have to do with CoreVideo and D3D playing videos? Nothing. The fact that OpenGL existed before DX is another red-herring.
You know, the fact that you have no idea what is going on in the world outside of Windows is going to lead you astray every time.
The simple fact that SGIs were doing these things back in 1990 shows that the idea wasn't new at all.
And of course the fact that Microsoft license the rights to the patents of all this technology from SGI back in 1998/99 must be... what, coincidence?
Fallacy. Show me where Apple aquired CoreVideo or CoreImage technology. The specific implementation that Apple uses.
Why?
It is about time that you started doing some research on your own. I haven't hidden any of this stuff, so you should be able to find that information just as easily as I can.
I'll give you a hint on CoreImage... it has something to do with the stimulant in coffee.
Windows and Office run on over 400 million computers, Windows runs on over 700 million... How many does the digital librarian run on? Where can you download a copy of the OS to try out? (Microsoft.com has free 180-day and 360 trials of Windows BTW).
Well, the Windows free trial won't run on any computer I own, so asking me to
boot up a copy is pretty much the same as me asking you to
boot up a copy of NEXTSTEP or OPENSTEP. I'd have to pay for hardware, you'd have to at least pay for the operating system (which you can still buy).
Besides, it was never how many systems a technology ran on, it was what came first. You were saying that Microsoft's indexing search abilities were what Apple copied... and I have pointed out that Apple didn't need to copy Microsoft in this area, they had acquired the concepts from NeXT.
And you haven't done a search on this yet? Do I really have to spell all this stuff out for you?
Unless you can prove to me that you can research this stuff on your own, this is going to be my final post on this subject.
Do you mean what features Windows had first or what features Apple copied?
Journaling... Microsoft beat OS X to all of these things among others.
Your premise is that Apple copied Windows, so it never mattered if Windows had something before Mac OS X, it only mattered if Windows had it first... before anything else.
For example... Journaling. I have a 1991 SGI IRIS Indigo that has a Journaled file system on it (XFS). That predates Windows using any form of Journaling, so Apple couldn't have copied Windows for that. NEXTSTEP had context sensitive icons back in 1990, Apple couldn't have copied that from Windows. Video hardware acceleration (decoding, de-interlacing etc.), hardware accelerated image processing are all part of what made SGI leaps and bounds beyond any other systems on the planet back in the late 80s, early 90s... Apple couldn't have copied that from Windows.
Of course Mac OS X is based on the original NEXTSTEP operating system... which dates back to 1987, so that is when true multitasking was first introduced into the line. Of course that was about the same time as OS/2 was released... but it was limited by the 286 processors (16 bit) that it was written for while NEXTSTEP was designed for the 68020/68030 processors (32 bit) and didn't have to jump through Intel's memory hoops to get things done.
And many of the advance features of Windows today are a direct result of OS/2. We shouldn't forget that NT was based on the IBM/Microsoft OS/2 project (and when Microsoft left the partnership with IBM, the new project was originally called OS/2 NT).
Sadly, Microsoft broke off working with IBM before Journaling was introduced into OS/2 Warp.
I though you said you didn't make stuff up?
Just because you have set your mind to believe one thing (despite all evidence to the contrary), doesn't mean I've had to make any of this stuff up.
Once you realize you have been wrong, you'll have a much better chance at learning the truth about this stuff.
But as it stands right now, you are
agenda driven rather than
fact driven. So far you have been
kicking and screaming against the cold hard truth of history because it doesn't match what you had in mind.
Not much I can do for you when you are coming from that position.
